wealth_advisory_wealth_tax_loss_harvest

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions routing through a dispatcher with JWT/tenant/company scope, but fails to describe what the action does, side effects, or expected outcomes. Critical for a financial tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief and front-loaded with the action name. The Args section is cleanly formatted. No extraneous content, though it could be more structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks context about the tool's purpose and expected behavior. For a complex wealth advisory action, more detail is needed to ensure correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds basic meaning: 'message' is a free-text objective, 'inputs' is an optional JSON string. However, it does not clarify valid values, formats, or examples, leaving ambiguity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states that the tool runs a specific domain agent action 'wealth_tax_loss_harvest', which is a distinct verb-resource combination. It differentiates from sibling tools by being a named action within the wealth_advisory domain, but it does not explain what tax loss harvesting means.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like other wealth_advisory tools. There are no context signals or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.